The U.S. airstrike ordered by President Donald Trump that killed Gen. Qassem Suleimani, the powerful and shadowy head of Iran's elite Quds Force, marks a major escalation in U.S.-Iran tensions and raises concerns about renewed conflict in the Middle East.
Here's what you need to know about Suleimani, his role in the region and what his death means for the U.S.
Question: Who was Suleimani, and why was he important?
Answer: Suleimani was the longtime commander of Iran's Quds Force, an external wing of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Suleimani played an important role in Iran's national security decision making process _ including weapons sales, training and financing armed groups in other Middle Eastern nations _ and reported directly to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
Suleimani's strong influence and relationships with various militias and terrorist groups _ which allowed Shiite-dominated Iran to build a network of non-state Shiite allies _ helped expand Iran's role in the region. His death, analysts said, is likely to result at some point in bloody retaliation.
Commander of the Quds Force for more than two decades, Suleimani earned his stripes while serving as a military leader in the Iran-Iraq war during the 1980s. Despite operating out of the spotlight for many years, Suleimani has emerged as one of Iran's most popular figures. A recent poll conducted in Iran by the University of Maryland revealed that Suleimani was ranked more favorably than President Hassan Rouhani and Foreign Minister Javad Zarif.
Q: How was he a regional power player?
A: Suleimani was well known for his ability to cultivate personal relationships with various militia groups in the Middle East, including Shiite militias in Iraq, Hezbollah in Syria and Lebanon and the Houthis in Yemen.
In doing so, Suleimani has been credited by Iranian officials with being instrumental in building armed networks across the Middle East to help extend Iran's regional influence. Starting in 2005, for instance, Suleimani coordinated Iraqi Shiite militias to fight against U.S. forces.
Q: Why did Trump want him killed?
A: Trump told reporters Friday that he ordered the killing to prevent future attacks on Americans. The Department of Defense said in a recent statement that the reclusive commander was "actively developing plans to attack American diplomats and service members in Iraq and throughout the region."
Recently, the Pentagon stated that Suleimani was behind a recent attack on a Kirkuk military installation in late December that resulted in the death of an American contractor and the wounding of four American troops.
Q: Why is Suleimani's death a big deal?
A: Suleimani's death could quell the Islamic Republic's ability to continue cultivating its network of militia groups and terrorist groups in countries such as Iraq, Syria, Yemen and Lebanon, analysts say. At the same time, it could eventually _ if not immediately _ result in retaliation.
Q: Was Trump's ordering of the U.S. airstrike that killed Suleimani legal?
A: Under the United Nations charter, there are three legal avenues that a country can use to justify military force against a foreign country.
A country can respond in self-defense if it has been on the receiving end of an armed attack. A country can assist an ally if it attacked and requests help. If a country is involved in a civil war, it has the right to invite other countries to help. Based on statements the U.S. government has so far released claiming Suleimani intended to attack American diplomats and service members in Iraq, various international law experts have different interpretations of whether the attack was legally justified.
Hina Shamsi, national security project director for the American Civil Liberties Union, said that under the White House's initial justification _ that Suleimani was in the process of planning an attack on Americans working in Iraq _ the airstrike would not have met the threshold under international law of "an act of self-defense against an imminent attack."
She added: "After almost two decades of expansive presidential claims of authority to use force abroad, Congress needs to robustly exercise the oversight and restraining powers that are integral to our system of checks and balances."
Jonathan Miller, a professor of international law and constitutional law at Los Angeles-based Southwestern Law School, has a different perspective.
"The U.S. can justify force against Suleimani if it feels that Iran was behind attacks on U.S. forces. The situation becomes more complex given that Iran often operates through proxies, but Iran is responsible for the conduct of its proxies if those proxies carry out attacks under its instruction," he said.
"Of course any use of force in response to an armed attack must be proportional, but in this case we are talking about a very limited strike that focused on an individual whose command responsibilities directly involved him with the Shiite militia who were attacking U.S. forces."
